Ðóñ Eng Cn Translate this page:
Nota Bene. Books, journals, publishing technologies.
Please select your language to translate the article


You can just close the window to don't translate ☒
Library
 Your profile
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Back to contents

Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law
Reference:

Arslanov K. M. Civil Legal (Private) Punishment by Tort: Prevention, «Personal Satisfaction» in Civil Law

Abstract: The subject of the research is the question of the admissibility of punishment (prevention, "personal satisfaction") as a function of civil liability. The issue is considered by the example of tort relations, especially in connection with the assault on intangible benefits. The comparative legal analysis of the Russian and German law is conducted. The particular importance in the development of the institute of private judicial punishment in the German law is a practice that can serve as an example for the development of Russian law in this area. It is concluded that in the Russian law in the field of civil liability the function of private punishment is not an alien. The method of comparative analysis on the example of a comparison of the Russian and the German legal experience was used in this paper. A comparative analysis of civil and criminal law in the protection of intangible benefits was made. The novelty of the study lies in the fact that the punishment (private punishment) is considered as a component (function) of civil liability. As a rule, the penalty is considered to be a characteristic of public-based brunches, including criminal law. Usage of the legal experience of German law to justify the possibility of use the private punishment ("personal satisfaction", prevention) in the Russian law is explained by the similarity of the legal traditions of the Russian and German law.

Keywords:

private punishment, personal satisfaction, prevention, German legal experience, compensation for moral damage, intangible benefits, tort law, judicial practice, civil liability, privacy protection.

This article can be downloaded freely in PDF format for reading. Download article

This article written in Russian. You can find original text of the article here .
References
1. Arslanov K.M. Nakazanie i preduprezhdenie v grazhdanskom pravootnoshenii (germanskiy pravovoy opyt) // Vest-nik ekonomiki, prava i sotsiologii. – 2013. – ¹ 4. – S.192-106.
2. Arslanov K.M. O funktsiyakh instituta grazhdansko-pravovoy otvetstvennosti (opyt germanskogo prava zashchity ne-material'nykh blag) // Rossiyskoe pravo v internete. – 2013. – Aprel' (2) (http://rlijournal.com/2013/04/arslanov/).
3. Arslanov K.M. Ponyatie grazhdansko-pravovoy otvetstvennosti po germanskomu pravu // Uchen. zap. Kazan. un-ta. Ser. Gumanit. nauki. – 2013. – T. 155, kn.
4. – S. 101-108. 4. Arslanov K.M. Faskhutdinov Z.M. Nakazanie po germanskomu grazhdanskomu pravu // Sovremennoe pravo. – 2005. – ¹ 9. – S.33-37.
5. Arslanov K.M. Funktsii pravovogo instituta vozmeshcheniya moral'nogo vreda pri posyagatel'stve na chest', dostoin-stvo, delovuyu reputatsiyu i sferu chastnoy zhizni grazhdanina po zakonodatel'stvu Rossii i Germanii. Diss… kand. yurid. nauk. – Kazan', 1999. – 211 s.
6. Bogdanov D.E. Spravedlivost' kak osnovnoe nachalo grazhdansko-pravovoy otvetstvennosti v rossiyskom i zaru-bezhnom prave. Diss… dokt.yurid.nauk. – M., 2014. – S. 470 posl.
7. Bogdanov D.E. Evolyutsiya grazhdansko-pravovoy otvetstvennosti. Opyt sravnitel'no-pravovogo issledovaniya. – M.: YuNITI-DANA; Zakon i pravo, 2012. – 119 s.
8. Bratus' S.N. Yuridicheskaya otvetstvennost' i zakonnost' (ocherk teorii). – M.: Yurid.lit., 1976. – 216 s.
9. Ioffe O.S. Otvetstvennost' po sovetskomu grazhdanskomu pravu.-L.: Izd-vo LGU, 1955. – 311 s.
10. Korneeva O.V. Postroenie vzaimootnosheniy v sisteme «deliktnaya otvetstvennost' – strakhovanie»: zarubezhnyy opyt // Zhurnal zarubezhnogo zakonodatel'stva i sravnitel'nogo pravovedeniya. 2011. ¹ 6. S. 62-65.
11. Matveev G.K. Vina v sovetskom grazhdanskom prave / otv.red.: Nikolaev K.P. – Kiev: Izd-vo Kiev. un-ta, 1955. – S.100.
12. Matveev G.K. Osnovaniya grazhdansko-pravovoy otvetstvennosti. – M.: Yurid. lit., 1970. – 312 c.
13. Nuriev A.Kh. Grazhdansko-pravovaya otvetstvennost' za vred, prichinennyy predprinimatelyam. Avtoref. dis. ... kand. yurid. nauk. – M., 2013.-22 c.
14. Rennenkampf N.K. Yuridicheskaya entsiklopediya. Izd. 4. Kiev – S.Peterburg, 1913. – S.201 posl.
15. Ryzhenkov A.Ya. Kompensatsionnaya funktsiya sovetskogo grazhdanskogo prava. – Saratov: Izd-vo Sarat. un-ta, 1983. – 94 s.
16. Sergeev S.S. Grazhdanskaya otvetstvennost' za nevypolnenie plana zheleznodorozhnoy perevozki gruzov (1959 g.) / V: Sergeev S.S. Sobranie sochineniy. V 10 t. Tom 1: Grazhdanskoe pravo: Sochineniya 1958-1970 godov. – M.: Statut, 2010. – S. 317-463.
17. Sobchak A.A. O nekotorykh spornykh voprosakh obshchey teorii pravovoy otvetstvennosti // Pravovedenie. – 1968. – ¹ 1. – S.49-50.
18. Ugolovnoe pravo Rossii. Obshchaya chast': Uchebnik / Pod red. F.R.Sundurova, I.A.Tarkhanova. 3-e izd., pererab. i dop. – M.: Statut, 2009. – S.171.
19. Khachaturov R.L., Lipinskiy D.A. Obshchaya teoriya yuridicheskoy otvetstvennosti. – SPb.: Izd-vo R. Aslanova «Yuridi-cheskiy tsentr Press», 2007. – 950 s.
20. Khokhlov V.A. Grazhdansko-pravovaya otvetstvennost' za narushenie dogovora. Diss… dokt.yurid.nauk. – Samara, 1998. – 349 s.
21. Aden, Menno; Arslanov, Kamil. Das Internationale Privatrecht der Russischen Föderation gemäß Art. 1186-1224 Grashdanskiy Kodeks // Deutsche Zeitschrift für Wirtschafts-und Insolvenzrecht. – 2014. – Heft 3. – S.106-114.
22. Bar, Christian von. Schmerzensgeld und gesellschaftliche Stellung des Opfers bei Verletzungen des allgemeinen Persönlichkeitsrechts // Neue Juristische Wochenschrift. – 1980. – Seiten 1724, 1729.
23. Bundesgerichtshof // Neue Juristische Wochenschrift. – 1977. – Seite 1288.
24. Bundesgerichtshof // Neue Juristische Wochenschrift. – 1995. – Seite 861 (865).
25. Bundesverfassungsgericht // Neue Juristische Wochenschrift. – 1973. – Seite 1221 (1222).
26. Bundesverfassungsgerichtsentscheidungen. – Band 34. – Seiten 269 ff.
27. Cramer P. / Kindermann H. Wege zur Reform des Schmerzensgeldanspruchs // Deutsches Autorecht. – 1980. – Seiten 33, 35.
28. Deutsch E. Schmerzensgeld und Genugtuung // Juristische Schulung. – 1969. – Seiten 197, 203.
29. Ebert, Ina. Pönale Elemente im deutschen Privatrecht: von der Renaissance der Privatstrafe im deutschen Recht. – Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2004. – 664 S. f.
30. Entscheidungen des Bundesgerichtshofes in Zivilsachen. – Band 18. – Seite 149.
31. Entscheidungen des Bundesgerichtshofes in Zivilsachen. – Band 35. – Seite 363.
32. Klumpp Steffen. Die Privatstrafe – eine Untersuchung privater Strafzwecke. Zivilrechtlicher Schutz vor Zwangskommerzialisierung / Schriften zum Bürgerlichen Recht; BR 266. Taschenbuch. – Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 2002. – 205 S.
33. Mugdan B. Die gesamten Materialien zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch für das Deutsche Reich. In 5 Bände sowie Ergänzungsband. Band 2: Recht der Schuldverhältnisse. – Berlin, 1899. – Seite 1119.
34. Oberlandesgericht Hamburg // Neue Juristische Wochenschrift. – 1996. – Seiten 2870-2874.
35. Oberlandesgericht Hamburg // Neue Juristische Wochenschrift. – 1996. – Seiten 2870, 2872.
36. Stoll H. Empfiehlt sich eine Neuregelung der Verpflichtung zum Geldersatz für immateriellen Schaden? Gutachten für den 45. Deutschen Juristentag. Aus: Verhandlungen des 45. Deutschen Juristentages. In 2 Bände. Band 2: Teil 1. – Karlsruhe, 1964. – Seite 155
Nota Bene
 
For authors
 
Other
 
Our sites
© 1998 – 2024 Nota Bene. Publishing Technologies. NB-Media Ltd.